editor decision started nature

Thus, it is rendered invisible as distinguishable component. Editors are responsible for making manuscript decisions based upon reviewer reports and their own reading of the manuscript. Also, there are only 29 directed links between the entities, resulting in a network density of 0.1, meaning that 10 percent of all theoretically possible edges occur. Also, we have found that participants in the process (see Schendzielorz and Reinhart, 2020) are translated into roles in the digitalized process (see Plotkin, 2009) and implemented as person-IDs in the digital infrastructure, only the latter distinctly displaying the infrastructure itself as an actor. While these activities certainly would exist without editorial management systems, the latter makes them more visible and suspect to monitoring and optimization, because they can standardize editorial practices. An official website of the United States government. How does the infrastructure support, strengthen or restrain the editors agency for administrating the process? editor decision started nature Can I ask the editor to publish a withdrawn manuscript after acceptance? The editor contacts potential reviewers. We devote our program to one of the most scathing and insightful indictments of the modern-day corporate media, particularly their subservience to power centers and how they eagerly spread disinformation campaigns in service to that power. They employ single-blind peer review, which means that the reviewers are aware of the authors identities unless otherwise requested by the authors. The status 'Decision started' indicates that the peer review process for your manuscript is complete and the paper is now with the editor. Hence, we draw from a growing theoretical literature on digital infrastructures from science and technology studies and also from literature about processes and practices in peer review from the social studies of science. Scilit | Article - Grand Challenges to Launching an Ideal Platform for Empirically, a panoply of orders occur in the manuscript histories, which means that for most of the stages, it is not predetermined in the systems implementation what happens next in the process. The latter means to us that while the system itself is hidden from us, we use what we have access to: traces of how the digital infrastructure is used. The identical numbers for both events indicate that they are released upon acceptance of the reviewer. According to Star and Bowker, infrastructures are used to enable, maintain and control collaboration among different actors (Star, 1999; Star and Bowker, 2006). We only find Review Started and Review Received in this respect, but we have, based on the event history only, no information as to what the reviewers might have recommended. Histograms of sums of durations between successive events in the process: The distribution is skew to the left; the log-scaled distribution is better leveled (Remark: 14 durations of length 0 are left out in the logarithmized plot). To obtain Furthermore, the following events were attributed to postulation: Manuscript File Added (N = 6,356), Manuscript File Replaced (N = 3,261) and Manuscript Withdrawn (N = 228), the latter being attributed to postulation because authors can decide as to whether they want to keep or withdraw their claim. Events triggered by (columns) and affective to (rows) the different roles assigned. [CDATA[// >